Wizard McMagic > Recent Status Updates

The last chapter delves into some discussion on climate fatalism and, as I saw it, how narcissistic it is. I wasn't surprised to read about those who are strictly against any form of resistance or collective action, but I was very interested to see a thorough critique of adventurism and unorganized militancy as equally fatalistic and self-serving.

The conclusion of the chapter, after much discussion of neglected tactics, muses on the when and how these tactics might be employed, to what extent, and the consequences if employed incorrectly. Namely, I think, it does emphasize a diversity of tactics with a core movement and multiple, more radical flanks working in tandem (Intentionally, or otherwise).

Some entertaining of the theoretical outcomes of well organized sabotage or property destruction, as well as musing on what exactly constitutes 'violence'. The idea being that equating property destruction with violence against people is ridiculous and taking that stance makes you hard pressed to find ANY resistance non-violent.

"The fall of the Berlin wall? People didn't caress the cement."

Discussion on types of 'sabotage' that don't involve running around and blowing stuff up, as well as the necessity to scrutinize and target consumerist emissions from the affluent and rich as a priority over the emissions of the impoverished. The distinction is made between "Luxury" and "Subsistence" emissions.

"Even in an emergency one pawns the jewelry before selling the blankets"

Analyzing a history of sabotage directed at fossil fuel equipment, from Palestine to South Africa to Europe, the question is raised why this sabotage is employed for the sake of many good causes, but *not* for the climate crisis, which these machines directly fuel.

As a contemporary reader, there's a cited example of Iran having incredible sabotage potential, yet refusing to perform any. This is very funny in 2026.

Discussion on if it is possible to create the changes to prevent climate disaster without the use of militant resistance and the potential of demonstrating the vulnerability of oil and gas infrastructure.

I disavow, of course.

"Protest is when I say I don't like this. Resistance is when I put an end to what I don't like."

All cited examples of progress through strictly non-violent, pacifist means are gradually debunked. including more from another mentioned text: "Why Civil Resistance Works".

"The remaining question is whether it is possible to locate even one minimally relevant analogue to the climate struggle that has not contained some violence."

An overview of the Climate Movement's ideology regarding strictly non-violent tactics, as laid out by the XR handbook and climate activist Bill McKibben. The many historical examples of non-violent resistance being cited by each, laid out as evidence for the proposed plan of strategic non-violence.

Laying down some stats about the use of the term “Terrorist”, the need to racially code the actions of Palestinian militants, and the circulating of the 40 beheaded babies myth to do so (Even to be parroted by the President Biden).

Interesting chapter. Analyzes the portrayal of the 'Noble savage' caricature as an alternative 'child' that is forever naïve, friendly, complacent, and ignorant. Contrasts with the 'urban child' who must grow up to be the ideal adult. If I understand all that correctly...

Been meaning to pick this book back up again after nearly finishing it and dropping it. Eager to get back into it!

So far it's just laying out a history of tactics used by contemporary environmental movements, and then setting the stage to analyze the nature of their tactics.

Good introduction. It lays out that the purpose of the book is to use empirical data of western news reporting on the genocide of Palestinians to analyze bias and manufactured consent, specifically from liberal, mainstream, or center-left media outlets (Right outlets are passed over because their stance is already very obvious). Right off the bat it reminds me a lot of Bad News From Venezuela.

Alright, back to business.

Well that was fun.

What a book! Many thoughts about this...

Quite the little identity crisis shaping up. I have a feeling the amulet doesn't like being on 24/7...

The post-script to the 2nd edition is a lot of the same as the first. That is to say, more evidence from more contemporaneously recent developments. I'll admit the sheer number of details made my head swim, but I generally understood that after receiving the $1.25B settlement from the Swiss banks, the investigative bodies needed to be sacked lest to blow the cover on the strong-arming operation. Oops.

The first post-script goes over some of the more contemporaneously recent developments in the Swiss banks case, including a bit of a dissection of the Gribetz Plan. The takeaways are that the metrics the plan cites are bogus in some was or another, and more importantly that the standard of action expected of the Swiss in this case was absolutely not applied to the USA's much more egregious record.

The book's conclusion concisely puts together the case that there is a phenomenon of utilizing the memory of the Holocaust by the American government and elite institutions that are aligned with it as a rhetorical cudgel to saber rattle against designated foreign enemies. This cudgel, of course, is never deployed to demonize violent US foreign policy (Holocaust comparisons become magically taboo, in those cases).

Just a staggering campaign of going after various countries for restitution in increasingly ridiculous manners, without once turning that sentiment towards the US, who has perpetrated many of the say things within the accusations, but is working hand in hand to assist the expropriation. Not a lot of this money actually goes to legitimate victims of these crimes, either. Quite a sad state of affairs!

Describing how the rhetoric of 'needy Holocaust survivors' was used as a spearhead to extort Swiss banks for money while also comparing the US's general attitude to other forms of restitution (Compensation to Haitians, Latin Americans, and Blacks). The conclusion is the existence of a double standard.

"Noble sentiments all, but nowhere to be heard... when it comes to African American compensation for slavery."

Lots of examples of the implicit reinforcement of a rigid authority hierarchy. I was most compelled by the claims that these hierarchies only get challenged when they go beyond the tacitly agreed bounds of authority, and how the response is to just go back to the same systems. Don't expose the contradictions, please!

"No matter there be a king, as long as he governs while hiding his steel hand in a velvet glove."

I was craving a cute, lighthearted palette cleanser. Dipped my toes into this one; it's got very cute art and the premise tickles me!

Discussion in the first few pages of the chapter highlights the odd world of familial relations in the comics; it's composed damn near entirely of uncles, aunts, and cousins. The observation is that this is to avoid having to brush up against sexual topics and presents an oddly more authoritarian nature to the duck families.

Very strange stuff.

Demonstration of the widening definition of who is a holocaust survivor and the use of that definition to obtain and misappropriate funds for pet projects all while ignoring many Jewish folk who actually did experience and survive the final solution.

"Kagan rings up in 12 days, Eagleburger in 4 days, and D'Amato in 10 hours what my mother received from suffering six years of Nazi persecution."

Concluding the chapter, it contains a lot of scathing critique of prominently lauded authors of holocaust literature, as well as showcasing the sorts of mechanisms of pushback that are deployed against scholarly critique of their works (Finkelstein explains an instance where this happens to himself). Double standards in how this rhetoric is deployed to comparable events display its ideological utility.

Good chapter!

Much discussion about the state of Holocaust literature, including the numerous fabrications of survivor’s stories from people who wanted notoriety (Binjamin Wilkomirski’s Fragments is used as a notable example).

“True, Wilkomirski fabricated his Holocaust past, but the larger truth is that the Holocaust industry… …was primed to celebrate the Wilkomirski fabrication.”

Decided to peek just a bit further into the next chapter. It's laying the groundwork for tackling the arguments regarding the claim of the uniqueness of the Nazi holocaust.

Just cleaning up the last few pages of the introduction. Admittedly the writing is sorta heady for my brain but I got the gist of it as a conclusion to the arguments regarding how adult authors curate a message for juvenile audiences through the prism of their own ideals of the past and future.

Finished the first chapter, where Finkelstein is laying out an observation about the cultural importance of holocaust remembrance within America both before the 1967 war and after it, drawing the conclusion that The Holocaust (Big H, defined by the book as an ideological instrument that refers the the historical event of the Nazi holocaust) was typically only employed if it suited American foreign policy interests.